More on the 65% Rule

Today's Austin American Statesman has an investigative report on the little-known group, First Class Education, which has been pushing the requirement that all school districts devote 65% of their budgets in the classroom. I found the following portion of the article very disturbing:

A First Class Education memo obtained by the Austin American-Statesman lists a series of "political benefits" of putting the 65 percent plan on the ballot. The memo says the plan will create divisions within education unions as dollars flow from administrators to teachers, and it says the plan will divert dollars away from other political goals of the "education establishment."

Citing voter trends, it also says the plan can help build support for voucher and charter school proposals, which critics say take money away from public schools.

"Women in particular want public education fixed, not replaced," it says. "Once additional fixing and funding of public education can be achieved via the First Class Education proposal, targeted segments of voters may be more greatly predisposed to supporting voucher and charter school proposals, as Republicans address the voting public with greater credibility on public education issues."

If this is indeed the true motivation for implementing this Rule, this represents a significant attempt to erode confidence in the public school system on a national scale.  Starving public education in order to promote vouchers and charter schools is bad public policy.  This plan will only serve to hurt the children of Texas and the future of our great State. 

As I have previously written, the problem with this Rule is in the definition of "in the classroom." Gov. Perry’s Executive Order refers to the definition used by the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). Under their definition, the following would NOT be included in the calculation of 65%: Administration, Plant Operations & Maintenance, Food Services, Transportation, Instructional Support, including Librarians, Teacher Training and Curriculum, Student Support, including nurses and counselors.

Spring Branch currently spends 62.3% on "in the classroom" expenses using the NCES definition.  Assuming no additional revenue (i.e., no new taxes or funds from the State), in order to get to 65%, we would have to reduce the excluded items by 7.3%.

What is especially difficult in considering this type of reduction is that many of the expenses that would be excluded are unfunded mandates by the State.  Each of the following unfunded mandate is good policy, but is, nonetheless unfunded by the State and excluded from the NCES definition of "in the classroom:"

1.  Counselors: A school district with 500 or more students enrolled in elementary school grades shall employ a counselor certified under the rules of the State Board for Educator Certification for each elementary school in the district.  A school district shall employ at least one counselor for every 500 elementary school students in the district. Texas Education Code §33.002.

2.  Staff Development: The staff development provided by a school district must be: (1)  conducted in accordance with standards developed by the district;  and (2)  designed to improve education in the district. Texas Education Code § 21.451.  Districts are required to budget adequate time and financial resources to support a comprehensive staff development program that promotes learning and collaborating with colleagues, reflects best practices, and is guided by the campus improvement plan developed through the site-based decision-making process. 19 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §153.1011.

3.  Librarians:  The Texas State Library and Archives Commission, in consultation with the State Board of Education, shall adopt standards for school library services.  A school district shall consider the standards in developing, implementing, or expanding library services. Texas Education Code §33.021.  School districts are required to comply with the state mandated minimum salary schedule that applies to the following district employees: teachers, librarians, full-time counselors, and full-time nurses. Texas Education Code § 21.402.

4.  Transporation: School buses shall be used for the transportation of students to and from schools on routes having 10 or more students who live more than two miles from their campus of regular attendance or who live in a designated hazardous area within two miles from their campus of regular attendance.  Texas Education Code §34.003.

Comments

[Sandra Poth]

Mr. Fallik,
I am currently researching the 65% initiative for my district Superintendent. To get background information, I contacted NCES about how/where the 65% idea came from since First Class Education uses the NCES definition. Frank Johnson of NCES responded and told me that the defintion of 'direct' instruction evolved into common practice by 1980. I asked if NCES has ever considered 'revisiting' (or reviewing) this 25+ year old definition. He stated that they (NCES) has not had hardly anyone ever ask about reviewing/revisiting. I guess I don't have to tell you how much has happened in 25+ in education and the world. I feel that since NCES is a component of the USDE, and, as such, is respected as THE source for all things like this....there should be some mandatory review process for such significant items as a definition that shapes educational policy as this 'direct costs' definition does.

Mr. Johnson went on to state that [quote] "The USDE is not supporting or connected in any way that I know of with the First Class Education initiative to get states to require that school districts spend at least 65% of total current expenditures on Instruction. FCE does site and use our definitions for instruction. These definitions have been in use since at least 1980. I believe that '65 percent' was chosen because it appeared chievable by the authors of this initiative. The national average (in 2002-2003) was 61.3%."

Interesting way of establishing crucial eductational policy--taking a simple average of state costs and picking a point above that average that is 'achievable'.

Thanks for reading my comment.
Sandra Poth